(Part 2) Does the Texas Form Title Opinion Work in Oklahoma? - The Rest of the Story
The presence of words such as . . . “Landowner’s,” modifying “royalty” . . . cannot be considered constructionally clarifying and should be omitted by the draftsman or, if used, ignored.” – Richard W. Hemingway (Eugene O. Kuntz, Professor of Oil and Gas Law, University of Oklahoma)
In our earlier article (see NADOA Q2 magazine), Does the Texas Form Title Opinion Work in Oklahoma? - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, we noted a curious trend over the years: the widespread use of a Texas-style title opinion in places like Oklahoma and the Rocky Mountain states driven by the significant influence of Texas-based or affiliated law firms branching out into other states. There we examined the foundational differences between Texas and Oklahoma’s approaches to oil and gas title opinions. We discovered that while the Texas Form 1 title opinion offers a valuable structure, its straightforward application in Oklahoma frequently results in a mismatch, particularly in aspects like ownership table structures, force pooling, managing multi-tract units and regulatory details. These differences highlight why a Texas-style approach may not fully
2. Working Interest (WI) vs. Leasehold : We will explore how Oklahoma’s approach to pooling and well spacing does not strictly differentiate between these interests as in Texas, questioning the practical significance of this distinction within Oklahoma’s operational context. 1 In our first installment we examined the Texas Form title opinion as presented by Houston lawyer Paul Yale, where he dissected the specifics of how these title opinions are structured. See , Paul Yale, Oil and Gas Title Opinions: Structuring and Format , in State Bar of Texas: OIL, GAS & MINERAL TITLE EXAMINATION COURSE (June 25-26, 2015, Houston, Texas), Chapter 17. (sometimes referred to herein as: “Yale” or the “Yale article”). 2 Note: These distinctions are not a big deal; but rather, they just of- fer a peek at how Texas and Oklahoma folks see things differently.
align with Oklahoma’s needs. Building on that foundation, this second installment aims to further explore these differences, focusing on key elements that define land and mineral rights in Oklahoma. Here, we will examine five distinctions that highlight the divergence between Texas and Oklahoma’s legal frameworks: 2 1. Landowner’s Royalty (LOR) vs. Royalty : We will clarify the differences between these royalty concepts, focusing on how the term “Landowner’s Royalty” as traditionally understood in Texas-style title opinions may not convey the same meaning in Oklahoma.
8
N at i onal A ssociation of D i v i s i on O rder A nalys t s
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting